Chevy "Forester" ---- SUbaru "Forester"

[dcarrb]

Originally Posted by Shadow248

Wrong. CR is a NOT FOR PROFIT organization (read: we take donations). They accept no DIRECT commercial contributions. That doesn't mean they aren't "on the take" as they say. There have been many studies done on CR's findings...many of these studies have found mountains of proof that CR is favoring certain brands. However, Consumer Union is extremely adept at squashing any attempt to criticize their publications. It's very hard to find anything about it on the internet, but I did anyway. Read up.

Please. I've read more compelling evidence that Elvis orchestrated 9/11.

Could be you didn't find much "information" on the Web dissing Consumers Union because there's little fault to be found.

dcb

[Royal Tiger]

This thread started out as a valid discussion on badge engineering and has turned ugly, again. This gets old after awhile. None of us can buy out GM's 20% of Subaru so although we can voice our opinion on it, we can't change it. And from what I read, Subaru's new design was started in house, not by GM mandate, so they are killing themself.

[pavanbabut]

Originally Posted by PA_SVX

This thread started out as a valid discussion on badge engineering and has turned ugly, again. This gets old after awhile. None of us can buy out GM's 20% of Subaru so although we can voice our opinion on it, we can't change it. And from what I read, Subaru's new design was started in house, not by GM mandate, so they are killing themself.

So u mean Subaru is killing itself or GM? .. sorry i didnt get you....

-Pavan.

Originally Posted by Shadow248

GM recalls their cars for faulty turn signals, tailgate supports, and ignition locks...etc. The SVX had a bad tranny, underengineered bearings and defective rotors...but did Subaru care? Of course not.

1) Most of the 92 trannys were bad, but Subaru was good about replacing them under warranty. True, they should have done something else. A recall would have been nice. The tranny was eventually fixed. My 95 has 160k on the original tranny.

2) Wheel bearings are a normal wear and tear item on all Suby's. With proper installation and normal driving, you can get them to last a while. My rear bearings have 70k on them with no problems.

3)The rotors could have been better, that's true. But they aren't defective. They tend to warp during high speed stops.....which I've only done once. Again, with normal driving the stock rotors are fine.


Dave

[Royal Tiger]

Subaru is killing itself with this new design theme it has. More bad then good.

[Matthewmongan]

when its all said and done i imagine they will have alot of new buyers. we are just old and afraid of change, well i am atleast.

[pavanbabut]

Originally Posted by Matthewmongan

when its all said and done i imagine they will have alot of new buyers. we are just old and afraid of change, well i am atleast.

yeah maybe its their new marketing strategy...... lets see how the market receives it....

-Pavan

[Shadow248]

Originally Posted by dcarrb

Please. I've read more compelling evidence that Elvis orchestrated 9/11.

Could be you didn't find much "information" on the Web dissing Consumers Union because there's little fault to be found.

dcb

Well if you don't accept online proof, and I can't very well hand you the articles that I used for my speech, what else can I do?

Believe what you want I suppose.

Originally Posted by red95svx

1) Most of the 92 trannys were bad, but Subaru was good about replacing them under warranty. True, they should have done something else. A recall would have been nice. The tranny was eventually fixed. My 95 has 160k on the original tranny.

2) Wheel bearings are a normal wear and tear item on all Suby's. With proper installation and normal driving, you can get them to last a while. My rear bearings have 70k on them with no problems.

3)The rotors could have been better, that's true. But they aren't defective. They tend to warp during high speed stops.....which I've only done once. Again, with normal driving the stock rotors are fine.

Right...however if that was the case with any GM car, at least two out of those three problems would have resulted in recalls, and i'd be here defending GM for performing said recalls.

[Landshark]

Originally Posted by Shadow248

Right...however if that was the case with any GM car, at least two out of those three problems would have resulted in recalls, and i'd be here defending GM for performing said recalls.

well in my last post you chose not to respond to anything, except my goofball comment. so i guess you got owned.

so why didn't GM recall my brakes in the Lumina, also back in the early '90's? took a class action lawsuit a few years later to sort that out. they just sneakily started putting drum brakes on later model years because the rear discs were complete crap - way to move forward GM! don't fix it, use older technology! if there was a problem with the fuel injection system, i wouldn't have been suprised if they started putting carbuerators on the later models.

the wife's old Cavalier went through ABS sensors about every 5-10 thousand miles. no recall?!?!?!? GM must have missed that one, because they are all that is good and holy with teh automotive world! bless you, GM. i will sell these devil Subarus and return to the flock, because you really care about me. the frequent visits i will make to your service dept. won't just be to fix the shoddy designs of your cars, but will be a chance for your service advisors to give me a big hug and tell me everything is ok and that they really care.

Originally Posted by Shadow248

Right...however if that was the case with any GM car, at least two out of those three problems would have resulted in recalls, and i'd be here defending GM for performing said recalls.

I'm not so sure about that. Recalls are done to fix safety issues...not annoying problems. You could argue that a tranny that didn't last long was a safety issue...it could leave you stranded in a dangerous spot. But as for the bearings and rotors, there was no safety issue at hand. Neither were prone to complete failure.



Dave

[dcarrb]

Originally Posted by Shadow248

Well if you don't accept online proof, and I can't very well hand you the articles that I used for my speech, what else can I do?

Believe what you want I suppose.

"Online proof." There's an oxymoron if I ever saw one.

Let's see, I can believe in the fundamental integrity of Consumer Reports, or I can believe what you say, because you say so. Tough call.

Originally Posted by red95svx

1) Most of the 92 trannys were bad, but Subaru was good about replacing them under warranty. True, they should have done something else. A recall would have been nice. The tranny was eventually fixed. My 95 has 160k on the original tranny.

Dave,

Wasn't the "campaign" ATF filter the product of a recall?

dcb

Originally Posted by dcarrb

Dave,

Wasn't the "campaign" ATF filter the product of a recall?

dcb

Too little, too late, IMHO. Chances were that by the time you had this installed the damage had aleady been done. If anything it allowed the trannys to last until just out of warranty...out of Subaru's hands and into yours! Not that it always happened this way. I know of a few 92 owners who managed to keep their original tranny's until 70 or 80k, and there is the occasional "odd ball" 92 that goes past 100k. When they finally had a good tranny (93?94?) they should have offered to replace the 92's.


Dave

[dcarrb]

Originally Posted by red95svx

I know of a few 92 owners who managed to keep their original tranny's until 70 or 80k, and there is the occasional "odd ball" 92 that goes past 100k.

Maybe (hopefully) the salesman was being truthful when he told me that mine had had a recent Subaru reman...

Getting back to the topic, Subaru's alliance with GM was fashioned with one goal in mind, obviously: To move more product out the Fuji Heavy Industries factory door. To date I'd guess the arrangement has probably been more rewarding for Subaru. Still, I wish they'd focus on building market share by building a superior product and supporting their customer base. Trouble is, especially in this day and age, success tends to be measured in terms of size and speed.

dcb

[pavanbabut]

Originally Posted by dcarrb

Maybe (hopefully) the salesman was being truthful when he told me that mine had had a recent Subaru reman...

Getting back to the topic, Subaru's alliance with GM was fashioned with one goal in mind, obviously: To move more product out the Fuji Heavy Industries factory door. To date I'd guess the arrangement has probably been more rewarding for Subaru. Still, I wish they'd focus on building market share by building a superior product and supporting their customer base. Trouble is, especially in this day and age, success tends to be measured in terms of size and speed.

dcb

But I hope somehow the brand name and its reliability tooo matters..... right?

Originally Posted by dcarrb

Maybe (hopefully) the salesman was being truthful when he told me that mine had had a recent Subaru reman...
dcb

All tranny's, reman or new, have indentification tags on them. the number should be near the starter. If the number has an "R" near the very end, it's a reman. Of course, I couldn't tell you when it was installed, but at least you would know it's not the original.


You can't blame Fuji for wanting to increase sales I guess. I just really hate all this mixing and matching. Before you know it, there will only be two or three car companies, and all the other companies will just be owned by one of those



Dave